Monday Morning Quarterback Part II
By BOP Staff
December 23, 2008
BoxOfficeProphets.com
Kim Hollis: Seven Pounds, the latest from Will Smith, opened to $16 million. Why do you think audiences gave this one less of a chance than The Pursuit of Happyness?
Pete Kilmer: The marketing was really vague. I still have no real idea what it's about.
Brandon Scott: It's funny. There have been complaints aplenty about the marketing, and while I think awareness was low, I thought I had a reasonable grip on what to expect from this - as a movie. The guy helps seven people to make his life worth living or something? I don't know, I didn't see it. Clearly studios were banking on Smith...his headshot was the movie poster, but no action, poor critical reaction and a message that audiences clearly weren't sure about will indeed lead to this being his first sub $100 million film in a loooooong time. It would be the shock of the year if it got there after this limp opening weekend.
Shane Jenkins: This is the purest test of star power that I can think of. The trailers showed nothing, and didn't make an appealing case for the film. So nearly every dollar spent on Seven Pounds is based wholly on the appeal of Will Smith. I'm with Brandon, in that I think $100 million is a pipe dream at this point, since from what I've heard of the story, repeat viewings and recommendations will be non-existent.
Scott Lumley: First Carrey, then Will Smith. I gotta say folks, I'm not buying it. Between the weather and the the Christmas shopping, I think these films got robbed. I expect a strong bounce back next weekend from both films.
Sean Collier: It's the economy, it's the economy, it's the economy. Gas jumped down, but movie tickets and popcorn did not. The fact that absolutely no one - even those who've seen the film - can explain what Seven Pounds is doesn't help, but we can't blame snow and shopping entirely.
Eric Hughes: I agree the economy may have something to do with Seven Pounds' low opening figure, but I think what the prophets were saying earlier had more of an influence. The marketing department didn't paint a clear enough picture on what this one was about. So people, like myself, failed to rank the movie high on their priority lists - even if Will Smith appears to do an awful lot of running around in the rain.
Reagen Sulewski: Selling a movie based on a mystery is fine, but you have to make sure it's something people actually care to solve. "Why is Will Smith acting so strangely?" isn't one, quite frankly.
Max Braden: Everyone's chimed in on the negatives of Seven Pounds. The difference between the projects was that Pursuit of Happyness had an adorable kid, and audiences love that. Plus it was an optimistic underdog story. Seven Pounds didn't offer someone you really wanted to cheer for. Given the timing with the economy, the Seven Pounds story could be looked at as a bailout movie, and maybe audiences didn't want to be reminded that they weren't getting a personal bailout this season from some rich benefactor.
David Mumpower: Reviewing the replies so far, I agree with Shane and Sean, disagree with Max and previously discredited Scott (who Professor Mumpower has determined needs to re-take Remedial Box Office 101 now). I also want to add to Reagen's point, but let's start with Shane and Sean. Shane absolutely drills the fact that while people are saying "this is disappointing for a Will Smith film", it is, if anything, a remarkable feat of box office power that he could get this result from this project. It is very close to asking audiences to go in blind on a feature simply because Smith is in it.
With regards to Sean's comments, I have previously stated my concerns about the economy testing the theoretical extremes of that archaic maxim that the box office is recession-proof. We're seeing pretty clearly right now that it's not, just that it's less negatively impacted than other industries. As to Max's thoughts, I believe that Pursuit of Happyness was one of the most depressing-looking movies in recent memory. It wasn't the kid or the optimistic underdog story that saved that one. It was the combination of the film being genuinely great and it being a pure star vehicle, a combination that generally does very well in December.
The key to Seven Pounds' disappointment is something Reagen touched upon. Sony sold this one using the M. Night Shyamalan playbook where they built a mystery while hoping for benefit of the doubt. That's always a dangerous move with potentially disastrous implications if potential consumers are not convinced that it's a mystery worth an emotional investment. How many people knew what Seven Pounds would be about prior to entering theaters? Almost none. How many of Smith's more casual fans were seduced by the ads into wanting to go see the movie? Almost none.
Daron Aldridge: I have to back Shane's observation about testing the power of Will Smith for the sake of being Will Smith. The billboards showed nothing other than what looked like a DMV photo. The same argument could be made about the posters for Benjamin Button, but at least we know what that movie is about. For all the talk of the "mystery" behind Seven Pounds, it fell flat to me and didn't compel me to see it for answers. It just left me cold. Something to remember about Pursuit of Happyness is that it was based upon a best-selling autobiography also, so the optimism that Max mentions was well-publicized.
Happy frickin' holidays, studios
Kim Hollis: Which do you think is more likely to earn $100 million, Yes Man or Seven Pounds?
Pete Kilmer: Tough call. I think Yes Man will be the one to limp to the $100 million mark first.
Brandon Scott: I'd be surprised if either make it. I would bet that Yes Man has the better chance on topic, as we might be light in the comedy department over the next month or so, but Willie is the most proven of stars. So while I don't suspect either will hit it, it's pretty much a toss-up as to which has the better opportunity. Outcome bleak. Prognosis negative.
Shane Jenkins: I think Yes Man will be Fun With Dick and Jane all over again, and barely crack the mark before being summarily forgotten about forever.
Joel Corcoran: I'd rather see Seven Pounds hit the $100 million mark, but in an objective analysis, I think Yes Man has a better chance of doing so. There is an outside chance that word-of-mouth and general intrigue about Will Smith being in this mysterious movie will bring more people into the theaters to see Seven Pounds over the next few weeks. However, Yes Man should win just by being the default option for a comedy film through the end of the year.
Tim Briody: Yes Man is a mortal lock for $100 million. The high tide rises all boats, but I'll say Seven Pounds is in a bit of trouble based on reception.
Scott Lumley: You have to go back a long long way to find a Will Smith movie that didn't cross the $100 million mark. I expect both of these films to easily rack up in excess of $100 million by the time the final tallies are in. Yes Man will get there first, but Seven Pounds should be right behind it.
Sean Collier: Yes Man. Dramas need good word-of-mouth, and Seven Pounds doesn't have it.
Eric Hughes: I say neither. I originally was leaning towards Yes Man, but the comedy may lose some business once Bedtime Stories invades on Christmas Day.
Max Braden: I'll say Yes Man. It may face competition from Bedtime Stories, but the competition from Benjamin Button will hit Seven Pounds harder.
David Mumpower: I don't believe either one is going to break $100 million, but if I had to pick one, Yes Man is the only legitimate option. Seven Pounds isn't going to get there, not with this buzz and these reviews. The argument for Yes Man is that it has opened a few million higher than Fun with Dick and Jane's $14.4 million debut in 2005. That one went on to earn $110.6 million domestically, but I'm dubious that lightning will strike again. That film's total from its Wednesday debut during Christmas week to January 2nd, the last day of holiday box office, was $64.6 million. I've been running some theoretical numbers for Yes Man based on historical models for this calendar configuration (which hasn't happened in a while). Christmas and New Year's Day coming on Thursdays means that the bonus box office revenue from the holidays is shortened by a couple of days on both ends. That immediately cuts the box office of Seven Pounds and Yes Man by several million each.
Daron Aldridge: My vote goes for neither. As I mentioned earlier, even with duplicating the success of Fun with Dick and Jane, Yes Man will come up about $6 million short of $100 million. Seven Pounds just doesn't have it in it to make it in that long run. My guess would be about $60 million tops for Will Smith.
Hey, animated vermin! How original.
Kim Hollis: The Tale of Despereaux opened to $10.5 million. Should Universal be pleased with this result?
Brandon Scott: This sucks terribly. I can't believe people didn't respond to this mouse. I also am surprised that the marketing must have been way off here. To me, the mouse seemed like a great underdog type of character that should have translated to kids and grabbed the adults here and there, too. Too bad. I was rooting for Despereaux, just cause he has some balls on him...taking chances and making the older mice shriek in fright. I wanted this to be the dark-horse performer of the season. Oh well.
Joel Corcoran: Pleased? Hardly. About the only thing Universal can be pleased about is that Tale of Despereaux had a better opening than the last animated movie release, Delgo. I don't know how anyone could be pleased with a $10.5 million opening when Alvin and the Chipmunks (which was a god-awful wretched mess of a movie) opened at $44.3 million a year ago, and Bee Movie, another disgustingly bad film, managed a $38 million opening weekend in November 2007. I don't think there's any good news to be had in Despereaux barely earning a quarter of what dreck like that opened to recently. However, I hope the film has a better run overall at the box office. The book (by Kate DiCamillo) is fantastic, and I'd like to see the movie do at least moderately well.
Scott Lumley: This is a terrible result for what looked like a really cute movie with some pretty good animation. I'm not that thrilled with Matt Broderick in the title voice role, but the trailers had me giggling in a couple of areas. I think Despereaux got creamed by the dual hammers of really lousy weather and holiday shopping. Hopefully it will recover enough over the next weekend to drag this into profitability. Does anyone have a line on what this cost to make? The animation doesn't look that fantastic but this sure doesn't look cheap either.
Reagen Sulewski: Let's not be too harsh - the budget is everything, so without that info it could be meeting expectations, or heads could be rolling at Universal. But the fact remains that if you're not Pixar or a sequel, you've got a really tough battle ahead of you to sell animation. It looks gorgeous, but too many parents have been burned on nice looking crap to try something new.
A historical note, though: The last time we had this calendar configuration for Christmas, another odd film about rodents had what seemed like a horrible start, then earned ten times for a total. I'm not saying this is going to be Mouse Hunt 2, but it's something to keep in mind.
Max Braden: No, but given the unexpectedly low opening for Bolt and the deflated weekend, I think they can excuse it as a result of overall depressed economic factors at work.
Ben Farrow: Despereaux looked beautiful but it was too complicated a story for animation's target. The side story of the dungeon guard should have been scrapped, and the intro of the queen's death was too long. The introduction of desperaux was delayed. It was beautiful to look at but man, was the pacing sloooowwwww. It should have started Indiana Jones-esque with despereaux doing some feat of daring-do through mousetraps, then roll into the main story. My son, who loved the book, didn't care much for the film. My younger daughter, who will watch anything animated, was bored and my friend's youngster (pre-K) wouldn't sit still. The theater was all but empty (less than a dozen people) and not a cough, laugh or anything could be heard.
It was an adult cartoon in a child's story. If you want word-of-mouth for kid's movies it has got to be linear, action packed and full on funny
Speaking of the theater - the main picture house was practicaly abandoned. I guarantee every movie sucked at the box office and the weather was not a factor.
Kim Hollis: Yeah, Ben. Our theater was exactly the same this weekend and it was 60 degrees here. We went to the the indie theater - which you can always count on to be packed at this time of year with people excited to see expanding films like Slumdog Millionaire. I think there were ten cars in the parking lot.
David Mumpower: A $10 million opening weekend and final box office in the $50 million range is what I had always expected for this movie. I guess the replies here show how much each individual's expectations for a title play into their evaluation of its opening weekend performance. I don't see this as anything other than a solid result for Universal. I never saw this title as having a blow-the-doors-off opening weekend and it's certainly not on the scale of the films Joel used for comparison. This title is more of a Space Chimps++, and it's performed as such. My only disappointment is that the reviews are decidedly mixed.
Daron Aldridge: The cost would determine Universal's take on Despereaux. The path David describes is close to how Hoodwinked performed in 2006, which wouldn't be horrible if it also had the reported $15 million budget of that film. Without the backing and reputation of a studio known for quality, entertaining animated films, like Pixar or Dreamworks, this is actually a bit higher than I expected.